Its looking grim

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:38:12 GMT, Chuck Wise wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:57:09 -0700, philski
wrote:

I agree with your view Ken. I think if the Dems ever want to get ahead
in the race for the White House, they need to dump the Gay Agenda. They
have more than they can deal with with "right to life". I don't think
there are enough gay votes (just my opinion) to sway a national vote one
way or the other. The dems need to " Steer Clear of the Queers" (an old
Idaho axiom)


Dammit, I swore I wasn't gonna do this. But my dander's up again.

Eleven states just voted to deny entry into the institution of
marriage to US Citizens based solely on their sexual orientation, and
YOU think GAYS have an "agenda"?

What would that be, exactly? Are they guilty of trying to "secure the
blessings of liberty to themselves..."? Damn that constitution.

As a devout and practicing heterosexual, I can't begin to understand
why it's any of my business whatsoever - or the business of the
government - what two or more consenting adults do in the privacy of
their own homes and relationships.

Heterosexuals have managed to make a complete mockery and debacle of
the institution of marriage: I've never seen it demonstrated that
homosexuals could possibly do worse.

But if two men or women love each other and want to get married and
share in the legal benefits, pitfalls, and sacrifice of "marital
bliss", and can find a willing church or justice of the peace, I say
"God Bless 'Em" and "God Help 'Em".

Chuck

I am relieved there is at least one other sentient entity on the face of the
earth that has a clue.

/daytripper (I was beginning to wonder...)

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:38:12 GMT, Chuck Wise wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:57:09 -0700, philski
wrote:

I agree with your view Ken. I think if the Dems ever want to get ahead
in the race for the White House, they need to dump the Gay Agenda. They
have more than they can deal with with "right to life". I don't think
there are enough gay votes (just my opinion) to sway a national vote one
way or the other. The dems need to " Steer Clear of the Queers" (an old
Idaho axiom)


Dammit, I swore I wasn't gonna do this. But my dander's up again.

Eleven states just voted to deny entry into the institution of
marriage to US Citizens based solely on their sexual orientation, and
YOU think GAYS have an "agenda"?

What would that be, exactly? Are they guilty of trying to "secure the
blessings of liberty to themselves..."? Damn that constitution.

As a devout and practicing heterosexual, I can't begin to understand
why it's any of my business whatsoever - or the business of the
government - what two or more consenting adults do in the privacy of
their own homes and relationships.

Heterosexuals have managed to make a complete mockery and debacle of
the institution of marriage: I've never seen it demonstrated that
homosexuals could possibly do worse.

But if two men or women love each other and want to get married and
share in the legal benefits, pitfalls, and sacrifice of "marital
bliss", and can find a willing church or justice of the peace, I say
"God Bless 'Em" and "God Help 'Em".

Chuck

I am relieved there is at least one other sentient entity on the face of the
earth that has a clue.

/daytripper (I was beginning to wonder...)

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:55:42 -0700, rw
wrote:

philski wrote:

Gays do have every right you and I enjoy. The problems associated with
being gay are real. I would not deny any person their just rights....

I'm warning you, philski, we we permit gay marriage they will book up
all the banquet halls. It will be chaos.


But I bet they won't do the "Chicken Dance", reason enough to ban all
straight marriages IMHO.


g.c.


An example of hetero
perversion:http://www.angelfire.com/tx3/txbabycat/

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:55:42 -0700, rw
wrote:

philski wrote:

Gays do have every right you and I enjoy. The problems associated with
being gay are real. I would not deny any person their just rights....

I'm warning you, philski, we we permit gay marriage they will book up
all the banquet halls. It will be chaos.


But I bet they won't do the "Chicken Dance", reason enough to ban all
straight marriages IMHO.


g.c.


An example of hetero
perversion:http://www.angelfire.com/tx3/txbabycat/

"Chuck Wise" wrote in message
...

Wolfie, I think you're starting to rub off on me.

I've slept with Wolfie and I can tell ya for sure, you don't want him to be
rubbin' on or off on ya, as it inevitably leads to fishin' together.

Mark --if ya know what I mean--

"Chuck Wise" wrote in message
...

Wolfie, I think you're starting to rub off on me.

I've slept with Wolfie and I can tell ya for sure, you don't want him to be
rubbin' on or off on ya, as it inevitably leads to fishin' together.

Mark --if ya know what I mean--

"rw" wrote in message
m...
philski wrote:

Gays do have every right you and I enjoy. The problems associated with being gay
are real. I would not deny any person their just rights....

I'm warning you, philski, we we permit gay marriage they will book up all the
banquet halls. It will be chaos.

I say give'em the banquet halls, if they agree to stay off the trout streams.

Mark --****, I'll agree to never go to another church, if all you godly types agree
to stay of the trout streams!--

"rw" wrote in message
m...
philski wrote:

Gays do have every right you and I enjoy. The problems associated with being gay
are real. I would not deny any person their just rights....

I'm warning you, philski, we we permit gay marriage they will book up all the
banquet halls. It will be chaos.

I say give'em the banquet halls, if they agree to stay off the trout streams.

Mark --****, I'll agree to never go to another church, if all you godly types agree
to stay of the trout streams!--

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
philski writes:

I have always been an independent. I knew my vote in Idaho would be
nothing more than a protest vote because I do not like Bush. I
particularly do not like Cheney. He lacks integrity. (not that Kerry has
an abundance of it either- )

I believe that is the problem with the Dem Party this time around: They
selected someone who they thought could beat Bush, not someone who they
thought
would be a good president. Lots of people voted for Kerry because of
their
dislike of Bush. That ain't no way to run a railroad. Pick a viable
candidate, someone without all the luggage that Kerry carried
(questionable VN
service, questionable actions after VN which probably lengthened the war,
a
Senator without a good record in Congress, a billionaire wife who looks
like
Tootsie and can't keep her trashy mouth shut, and the blunder of all
blunders,
picking Edwards as his running mate). It was a train wreck waiting to
happen.

You do not vote because you hate someone; you vote because you think your
candidate is the best qualified.

Goddamn, you are a sick maggot.

Wolfgang
who quails for humanity as long as this kind of filth breaths and breeds.

"Chuck Wise" wrote in message
...
snip

Why, Chuck, I do declare, there appears to be hope for you yet!

Wolfgang
are you married?